Reformed1689
Well-Known Member
I am fine with that, but that pushs the 6 day creation and the flood back to about 300 million years ago based on common flood evidence on both sides of the Atlantic.
Wow, no it doesn't.
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
I am fine with that, but that pushs the 6 day creation and the flood back to about 300 million years ago based on common flood evidence on both sides of the Atlantic.
Can you cite the basis for this belief?Yes, Earth is 4.55 billion years old.
Except that there is zero Scriptural evidence for this view.For the record, I believe in a literal 6 day creation of the Earth (Genesis 1:3-31). And materially the earth existed prior to the 6 days (Genesis 1:1-2) which accounts for the 4.5 billion years in the Solar System. I believe the Sun became the star that it is on day one. The fourth day the debris was blown past the earth where the Sun and Moon with the stars became visible as distinct lights in our Earth's sky.
That depends - for the sake of the discussion, according to certain branches of Modern Physics (Which I took at Syracuse University at Utica) The universe is still expanding with ongoing creation.You mean the Earth in 6 days. The universe was 13.7 billion years ago.
That 4.5 billion years would have to be before the 6 days, or not at all in which case there is big problem with denying the evidence for half life which there is no evidence against. Do you have any?
The half life of isotopes. And that relates to the 4.5 billion for the age of our Solar System, not the universe. The age of the universe is based on measurment of its rate expansion. The current measurments place the age of our universe at about 13.7 billion years. No earth rocks date 4.5 billion. Moon rocks and meteorites are the bases for the 4.5 billion (and unlead gasoline, from an episode of Cosmos, LOL).Also it depends upon what you mean by "Half Life". If you mean isotope half life then how do you relate it to the age of the universe?
Many Half Life theories of geological dating show that it is not reliable.The half life of isotopes. And that relates to the 4.5 billion for the age of our Solar System, not the universe. The age of the universe is based on measurment of its rate expansion. The current measurments place the age of our universe at about 13.7 billion years. No earth rocks date 4.5 billion. Moon rocks and meteorites are the bases for the 4.5 billion (and unlead gasoline, from an episode of Cosmos, LOL).
The Mcgraw Hill Science and Technology Encyclopedia on the dating of the geological ages only gave one cite for (one rock) for each age (if I remember correctly). The reason I mention this is the so called geological time scale is based on what would be the global flood evidence, which was one event which took place at one time.Many Half Life theories of geological dating show that it is not reliable.
https://www.nde-ed.org/EducationResources/CommunityCollege/RadiationSafety/theory/decay.htm
Radiometric Dating Does Work!
The Mcgraw Hill Science and Technology Encyclopedia on the dating of the geological ages only gave one cite for (one rock) for each age (if I remember correctly). The reason I mention this is the so called geological time scale is based on what would be the global flood evidence, which was one event which took place at one time.
Now the issue is if we accept the dating of the coasts to the bottom of the Atlantic trench, that sets the flood as well as the 6 days of Genesis 1 to be about 300 million years ago. Just saying.
"Noah's flood" predates Noah by over 2,000 years. Also, \wWe have written records going back more than 7,000 years. I am at a loss to understand why you reject reality; God would also be baffled, I suppose.
I believe we need to be precise in what we say. The earth and water is still here.
Please note that the Genesis flood predates Genesis by over 2,000 years, and was local, not global. Also, written records go back more than 7,200 years. Why do you wish Earth to be young, when the evidence shows otherwise? God will not be mocked.
I am fine with that, but that pushs the 6 day creation and the flood back to about 300 million years ago based on common flood evidence on both sides of the Atlantic.
You mean the Earth in 6 days. The universe was 13.7 billion years ago.
That 4.5 billion years would have to be before the 6 days, or not at all in which case there is big problem with denying the evidence for half life which there is no evidence against. Do you have any?
First, there is no textual evidence for your interpretation. Zero. Second, there is no historical basis for your interpretation. Third, you have yet to answer whether or not Adam and Eve were created as babies or fully mature human beings.
Evolution is a lie that is trying to get people to focus of the truth of the scriptures and God as the Creator to natural processes, and so no need for a God even! And old earth Christians still have a real problem with explaining how there can be death and other bad things before the fall even happened!This is actually false. Why do you think there is nothing left from before the flood?
How is YEC irrational? I mean really? Could it not be that everything was created with the appearance of age? Or do you believe Adam and Eve were babies crawling around on day one of their existence?
Yes, but do you agree it is the same dirt/mud/water that was here pre-flood just in different locations?I don't know what you are talking about exactly. The Genesis Flood destroyed the known world before Noah and caused the land mass to break up into seven continents. I think that even secular geologists agree that the land mass was broken up into seven continents at one point.
Calculating the age of The age of earth, the Milky Way or the universe is a totally misplaced application of Half Life.There is a great deal of evidence about half-life and there have been many threads here about it. For one thing, there is no chain of custody to show that the rate of decay was the same always.
Yes, but do you agree it is the same dirt/mud/water that was here pre-flood just in different locations?